On recent movies: “They suck”
“Let me have a show of hands of people that would say the last seven or eight months of movies is the worst lineup of movies you’ve experienced in the last five years of your life. hey suck. It’s unbelievable how bad movies have been.”
Sounds like you, right? Your friends. Co-workers. Basically if you strike up a conversation with any typical consumer, this is the reaction. Could be any one of them. But would you expect these words to be spoken at a public forum by a studio executive? And not just any studio executive, but Jeffrey Katzenberg? Film exec at Paramount, then Disney? One of the three partners at Dreamworks (along with David Geffen and Steven Spielberg)? He said of movies: They suck?
Yes, indeed. And much more in an appearance at with Fortune’s Andy Serwer:
[Evidently the embed is messed up. To see the Katzenberg video, go here.
In addition to his succinct assessment of the quality of current movies, Katzenberg had a lot to say about the movie business. Here are some excerpts:
On 3-D: “I mean, well, for sure it came, and for sure the bloom is off the rose for a moment in time, driven by a singular and unique characteristic that only exists in Hollywood, greed. And, you know, so I think there were, unfortunately, a number of people who thought that they could capitalize on what was a great, genuine excitement by movie goers for a new premium experience, and thought they could just deliver a kind of low-end crappy version of it, and people wouldn’t care, or wouldn’t know the difference. And anything ?? you know, nothing could have been further from the truth. So, I think that it’s a ?? I think Hollywood has managed to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory here. And with time we’ll get back there again, but it’s only going to come by understanding and embracing this as a creative, storytelling tool, and a way of giving an enhanced movie theater experience, premium experience.”
On the uncertainty of the movie business: “…more people are actually watching movies today than ever before around the globe. The question is, how are they going to do that, how are they going to access it, how much of it is going to be through streaming, how much of it is going to be bundled, how much of it is going to be on a per-play basis, how much of it is going to be digital, how much of it is going to exist in the cloud, and we can go on, and on, and on with all of these things, all of which are incredibly real. And so, right now in the center of that is a change in habits, a change in platform, a change in delivery, and therefore uncertainty and challenges financially.”
On looking for good stories: “…we’re always looking for a great idea, a great story. You know, people often ask, well, how do you know if something is a great story, and unfortunately I think it’s more art than science to that. I do know that there are some things that just catch people’s interest and it doesn’t matter, and sort of it works anywhere anyplace in the world. I have to say every time I ever said the words “Kung Fu Panda” wherever I was in the world somebody would smile and say, “What’s that about?” That to me is a good idea. Just, I mean, it’s not a story, but at least it’s something that is going to intrigue people, and it’s a place to get started.”
On Ratatouille: “I only know of one time that I can think of in the field of animation where somebody had a bad idea and had perfect execution and the movie was breathtaking: Ratatouille. So, here’s a thing — the thing is, which is I assure you this is a bad idea. I’m going to have a semi-realistic rat in a kitchen cooking shit to eat. (Laughter.) Now, there’s no one in their right mind that’s going to say, “Well, that’s a good idea.” It’s a bad idea, and it’s so beautiful in its execution, it’s such a great piece of storytelling, I think one of the great pieces of animation of our time. So, it’s, you know, the home run is when you have a great idea and great execution.”
The very nature of the movie business and how completely unclear what the future holds reinforces one fundamental tenet: The need for great stories. No matter what transpires in the world, a great story executed well as a movie stands an excellent chance of being a success, both critically and financially.
And where to get started? Katzenberg gave you the clue: “Kung Fu Panda.” A story concept that is “going to intrigue people.” Yes, once again, I hammer on the importance of story concept.
Every day this week, I will be featuring studio executives. Why? Because I have yet another GITS scheme in the works. More on that later this week. Suffice to say if you run across a great article or feature on a studio or studio executive, please post in comments or email me.
For a transcript of the Katzenberg talk, go here.
UPDATE: The comment by Katzenberg about Kung Fu Panda has special relevance as THR just announced a jury has handed down its decision in this case:
A Los Angeles jury has sided with DreamWorks Animation in a big lawsuit claiming the idea for the hit Kung Fu Panda movies was stolen from a man who pitched the studio months before it began developing the project without him.
Terence Dunn, a self-described “writer-producer-teacher-philospher” who was CEO of a company called Zen-Bear Inc., sued in June 2010 for breach of an implied contract, alleging that he brought the idea of a “spiritual kung-fu fighting panda bear” to a DreamWorks executive in November 2001 with the expectation that he’d be included in any film project. Dunn alleged that his kung-fu bear was “adopted by five animal friends in the forest (a tiger, a leopard, a dragon, a snake and a crane), whose destiny is foretold by an old and wise sage, Turquoise Tortoise, and who comes of age and fulfills his destiny as a martial arts hero and spiritual avatar.”
— —
The jurors decided that DWA and its executives did enter into an implied-in-fact contract, but the panel found that the studio didn’t use Dunn’s ideas, so the question of damages was moot.
Wow. Guy pitches a spiritual kung-fu fighting panda bear adopted by tiger, leopard, dragon, snake and crane to DreamWorks… and the jury determines that the studio didn’t use his “ideas.” So where did DWA come up with the “idea” of a kung-fu panda movie? They heard Dunn’s pitch, forgot it completely, then came up with their own idea? Either that is one dumb jury or the facts have got to provide a completely different picture because I don’t get that decision at all.